The American Heritage Dictionary defines "forensics"
as "the use of science and technology to investigate and establish facts
in criminal or civil courts of law." The term has become more common
in human rights investigations. As journalists assume a growing role
in reporting human rights violations, they need to acquire a more concrete
sense of what constitutes reliable - and admissible - evidence. Stories
built on rushed, poorly reported, or second-hand evidence are more susceptible
to challenges and political attack.

Investigating human rights violations has many techniques
in common with investigating other crimes. But while a U.S. crime reporter
may have access to police, special investigators and a highly developed
judiciary system, international reporters often operate in a legal vacuum
- or within a legal system that conspires to hide evidence of an official
abuse.

If a journalist is among the first to arrive at the scene
of an abuse, he should take pains to observe and document as much physical
evidence as possible.

Found at Sahanici grave: two handkerchiefs, a comb.
On Rohde's notebook, a survivor drew a sketch of a nearby gym used to
hold victims. Photo: Christian Science Monitor

It is useful for even print reporters to travel routinely
with a camera and to know how to take serviceable pictures. Photos do
not constitute infallible evidence, but they help, and can be valuable
for later interpretation or an aide memoire. Physical evidence of violence
may include traditional elements, like bones and bloodstains. But in some
instances, items like shell casings, papers, or pieces of clothing can
be equally crucial. It is also important to absorb and convey a sense
of the context of the scene - what is the surrounding area like? Where
are the access roads?

In most situations, one should not disturb physical evidence.
(In the case of Srebrenica, however, David Rohde had reason to believe
that those who came after him would seek to destroy evidence. Therefore
it made sense for him to take items like documents and pieces of clothing
with him for further analysis.) See map.

Few stories -- or legal cases -- rest on physical evidence
alone. Often the evidence cannot be interpreted without interviews with
possible witnesses or others familiar with details of the events. Journalists
should also seek expert advice at an early stage. They are not expected
to be experts in all fields, but rather to identify and reach experts
who can reliably interpret the evidence at hand. For example, DNA tests
conducted on a murdered child might determine his living relatives or
parents. Examination of bones or skulls may also determine what weapons
were used, or the capability of perpetrators.

Town meeting notes found by Rohde at a gravesite
in August were identified as belonging to missing men from Srebrenica.
Photo: Christian Science Monitor

"As long as there are pieces of a body, forensics can
be used to make out a case of what happened, when it happened, the identity
and age of the victims and how they were killed, " says Nathaniel Raymond,
spokesperson for the Boston-based Physicians
for Human Rights (PHR).

Founded in 1986, PHR has conducted medical investigations
of human rights violations in over 50 countries. It is one of the many
reservoirs of expertise that journalists can use to interpret findings
on the ground. Journalists must also seek the following experts: pathologists
for physical torture, psychiatrists for mental torture; ballistic or
military experts for ammunitions and firearms; scientists and non-governmental
workers for historical context.

A war crimes investigator, from Tuzla, reconstructs
the body of a man killed in the hills of Kravice in September 1996.
Photo: AP

"Your job is to present the facts. It is up to the courts
to determine guilt," says Paul Martin of the Columbia University Human
Rights Clinic. "Report on the debates as to whether a crime has happened
and leave it to the public to judge."

To inform one's reporting, it is important to have working
knowledge of humanitarian law and the institutions of justice.

1. Journalist hears rumor or learns of an event in
which a violation of human rights may have occurred.

2. Journalist conducts preliminary inquiries to verify
information on Internet or other means.

3. Journalist visits scene of crime to interview
witnesses and people with relevant information or positions on the event.

4. Journalist gathers physical and testimonial evidence,
compares testimonies, reconstructs sequence of events and draws conclusions
about what may have happened.

5. Journalist seeks explanations from the responsible
authorities, the perpetrators or protagonists.

6. Journalist compiles findings into a report.

The journalist must be
satisfied that she/he knows how, when, where, and why an event happened. "Focus
more on the victims and witnesses and those who are responsible and preserve
their testimony for later use," advises Dogvan Ivanisevic, Human
Rights Watch's researcher on former Yugoslavia. "There is no general
recipe," he adds. "Everyday brings different risks and you have to respond
to the situations."

While human rights researchers
face similar challenges, the stakes for journalists are especially high, since
their reports often form the basis for public opinion and deeper investigation
by international authorities or human rights groups. The highest premium is
on reliability: never misrepresent, exaggerate, or tamper with the evidence.